Haven't posted on here in ages but still continue to read the board from time to time and there's been quite a few comments and comparisons about Simpson and Fryatt. On the 'quality of current squad thread' especially there has been a lot of talk re whether Fryatt is good enough to play in the Prem and there seems to have been a disregard for Simpson. I know that I'm likely to get shot down for this but I think Simpson will do a better job than Fryatt, if by some miracle we went up and I regard him as a better overall striker. Here's why, Fryatt is undoubtedly the better finisher, however, there is more than just scoring to a strikers game which albeit does seem strange. Last season Fryatt contributed 18 goals (16 goals, 2 assists), but so far this season Simpson has contributed 13 (6 goals, 7 assists). Now should he continue as he is doing for the rest of the campaign, he's likely to contribute more goals than Fryatt. Personally, I also think that for his size Simpson is fantastic at holding the ball up and playing with his back to goal. These are traits which aren't Fryatt's greatest assets and along with Simpson's extra bit of pace, I believe his transition to the Premier League would be more successful and he also has the advantage of having played in it before.
Your argument is flawed I am afraid. Comparing Simpson playing in this side to Fryatt playing in what was left over of Nigel Pearson's era at Hull is simply unfair. Matty Fryatt was feeding off scraps when he scored 16 goals last season. He had the weight of responsibility to score with what was often only one or two chances a game. If Simpson played this role he would be far far less effective. If Fryatt was playing in the team right now who is to say he wouldn't have vastly improved on last years tally? I mean let's face it, we are playing significantly more attractive attacking football and creating far more chances. Comparing a striker playing in last years team and this one is really a pointless exercise. Of course it's all a matter of opinion but I think most people would agree that if we had a player of Fryatt's quality available we would be looking a real threat to take the league right now.
Simpson or Fryatt in the Prem? I'd rather we had a new striker/s altogether though I think Simpson would be better suited to the top league, just a gut feeling on that one
I agree with Beverley_Tiger that comparing Simpson in this team to Fryatt in the Pearson/Barmby side is completely unfair. As I posted in another thread, Proschwitz, Simpson, McLean and Mark Cullen have played 169 league games between them and scored 23 goals. That's appalling, and with Fryatt injured we clearly need reinforcements in January. In the Premier League I don't think Fryatt would be up to much, but as Simpson isn't much cop in this league I doubt he'd be the answer to any problems we'd have in the top-flight.
The argument's flawed both ways. The OP recognises that it isn't just about goals which is right but then more or less suggests it's just about goals + assists, there's far more to it than that. However, the argument that BeverleyTigerDJH put forward is also nonsense IMO, it's a complete myth that we didn't create chances last season. If you look back at threads on here from 12 months ago we were all saying the same things as now; that we were playing really well but just needed a quality striker to finish the team off because we were creating a lot but missing ridiculous numbers of chances. Nothing has changed in terms of attack IMO, we've lost Fryatt but we've gained Simpson. Both decent all-round players and capable of scoring but Fryatt wastes far too many chances to do so and Simpson doesn't seem to be getting in the right positions lately, but earlier in the season he was on the end of everything. Personally I prefer Simpson. He's an all-round striker but I don't think people realise how good his finishing is. He's hardly had a proper chance the last few weeks (which is probably partly his own fault for not getting in the positions) but when he gets in a proper shooting position in front of goal he generally scores. He shoots with power and accuracy, which none of our other strikers do (Proschwitz excluded for obvious reasons).
Based on a simple linear model if we assume we carry on for the rest of the season. Fryatt 66 shots on target out of (92) 16 goals Simpson 42 Shots on target (78) 12 goals Chances (based on shots, appreciate this is limited) Last season 294 on target 258 off target 19 times hit the WW. (47 goals) This season 262 on target 286 off target 20 times hit the WW (70 goals total) Fryatt has a 17% goals per shot Simpson 15 % 71% of Fryatt's shots were on target, only 51% of Simpson are. Can't be bothered to try make any sense out of this, think it flaws both the original argument and the one I was trying to make. Basically it's remarkable how close we are based on shots but we created more last season and wasted a lot more too. So this season you could say we are better at scoring. (kind of obvious) Shots taken don't really count for "chances" either I suppose. Be interested what sort of KPI's football clubs actually measure strikers on. I think you really do have to take into consideration that they are playing in different teams.
i think because Football is so fluid compared to say Gridiron , Baseball , Cricket and RL means there are very little stats kept on players and games when compared to other sports. unlike any of the other sports for eg in football a striker can spend 95% of game time on the wing , make 3 runs into the box with the ball , 2 without and score with a header from a corner , have the opposing defender pulled all over the place while not even having the ball etc etc. So it kinda makes keeping ratio stats meaningless unless they become so specific there is nothing to compare with. Like with that data sheet shared on here the other week , it was choc full of stats in ( football terms ) but it mostly means nothing and teams summaries stayed vague to keep accurate and credible
Fryatt could very well return to pre-season training as a PL striker. I also think Simpson is ok for the PL. But not as a starter.
A striker may well have a hand in other aspects, but principle role is goal scorer and then assister. Fryatt squandered chances like a drunken monkey. Goal-scoring opportunities were in abundance last season; he would probably still be squandering them. Forget PL; we need a goal- scoring striker in now. Last season our midfield gave the ball away more than this. This season we have a far better midfield who look for a finish and goals throughout, which is helped by better tactics.
My argument was flawed and I didn't get the point across I wanted. Fryatt and Simpson's stats from Beverely Tiger are extremely close so I would definitely prefer Simpson as he holds the ball up far better, is slightly less useless in the air and works a little harder than Fryatt.
Fryatt is clearly the better player, they are very similar in style but Simpson goes about it with more physicality ie pace and strength where as fryatt is about precision and reading the game. Anyone else noticed koren hasn't looked the same this season without fryatt in front of him? Those 2 were on the same wavelength and had a great understanding, the pair of them cut open defences and pulled defenders all over the shop for ****s and giggles.
Fryatt would be good with Koren and Quinn pulling the strings. He's more of the goal scrounger we need. He misses a lot of chances, but at least he's having a go. Simmo doesn't seem to have the confidence to shoot, but is coming deeper more often and linking up with the midfielders.
Fryatt wouldn't have prospered in our present style of play. We play fast flowing football. Fryatt would be left at the half way line trying to catch up. Sorry, but he's to slow.
I think every aspect of Fryatt's game is better than Simpson's, even if he does take too many touches in front of goal. If we hadn't lost him for this season, we wouldn't be languishing down here in second place.
i think simpsons link up play is superior to fryatts, some of the stuf he worked with aluko at times this season has been quality.. fryatt is the better goalscorer tho and as people have said thats the one thing we are really missing at the moment , a consistent championship level finisher and as we have aluko and koren etc for link up - i agree that a fit fryatt would probably put us in the top 2 at the end of the season.
The problem is we created chances but Fryatt made most of his own chances by runs that Simpson wouldn't make. Its fair enough saying Fryatt missed a lot of chances but Simpson doesn't get those chances because he doesn't make those runs. Fryatt would of loved the balls where getting, the one's just beyond the defender and wanting slotting into the net. I think its unfair to say goals are the main thing we deal in, however Simpsons finishing has been poor and clearly we need someone to put the chances in.
